Read the full judgment text of HCCT000033/1999 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 28 September 1999 before The Hon Mr Justice Findlay, in Chambers.
Building disputes — Construction contracts — Professional engineering duties — Arbitration — Interpretation of expert codes — Client’s duty to inform consultant — Assumed design loadings — Leave to appeal — Court's deference to arbitrator. The applicant, SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST PUBLISHERS LIMITED, engaged the respondent BINNIE BLACK & VEATCH HONG KONG LIMITED as consulting engineer for a custom-built building in Tai Po. Litigation arose over alleged deficiency in floor slab load capacity. The contract contained an arbitration clause; arbitration ruled against applicant. The applicant sought leave to appeal alleging errors in the arbitrator's interpretation of the ACI Code and alleged failure to apply law regarding client's duty to inform consultant and consultant’s duty to seek confirmation. The court held that the ACI Code, not binding law but expert evidence, was correctly interpreted by arbitrator. The client’s obligation to inform and consultant’s reliance on information were fact questions rightly resolved by the arbitrator. Silence after requested confirmations can imply assent, a fact-dependent decision for arbitrator. No manifest error found justifying appeal. Leave to appeal refused, costs ordered against applicant.
Legal issues: Proper construction of paragraph 10.6.6 of the ACI Code · Client's obligation to inform professional consultant of relevant matters · Whether professional consultant entitled to proceed without confirmation on important matter · Whether arbitrator’s decisions meet threshold for granting leave to appeal
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal refused; costs ordered against applicant.